DiscoverBrowse CategoriesHow it worksMethodologyFor developers
Pixel Gun 3D: Online Shooter
Cubic Games · Games

What’s the catch? Pay to progress — reported by 50 users.

Analyzed automatically from 3 independent signals that had to agree — not a hands-on test, and not human-reviewed.

1 on the catch list · analyzedConfidence: Low3 signal sources542 reviews scannedNot human-reviewedas of 2026-10-05
 Which version this describes

This analysis describes version 26.11.3 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.

The store currently lists version 26.12.0, updated 2026-10-03.

The app has been updated since this analysis. The findings on this page describe version 26.11.3, not the version now listed on the store.

Release notes for the newer versions, in the developer’s own words:

Version 26.12.0 · 2026-10-03
The forest turns to amber. Follow the fireflies into the Autumn Fairytale Season. NEW - Autumn Fairytale Season. Golden light, old rules, an amber-hearted tree. - Armory. 5 new weapons, from the firefly bursts of Pixie Gun to Last Firefly. - Heroes. Tricky Pix knows every shortcut, Majestic Dryad keeps the woods. - Events. Portal Network, Scrap 4 Scrap and Circle of Spirits hand out prizes all season. IMPROVEMENTS - Map Rotation - Bug Fixes

What the analysis found

Each finding shows what agreed and how strongly. Automated analysis

The catch list 1

Charges we publish at a strength we stand behind: measured from an artefact, agreed by independent sources, or reported by enough users to clear that charge's own published bar.

Reported by users: Pay to progress
Reported by 50 usersReported by users, not measured — nothing we can inspect could show this either wayview evidence
Advancement or competition is gated behind spending money rather than playing.
What we saw: Raised by 50 distinct reviewers — 9.2% of the 542 reviews scanned on this store leg (App Store).

One source only — shown, not confirmed 1

A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.

Reported by users: Aggressive ad load
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is user reviews.view evidence
Advertising volume or placement that interrupts normal use: ads between every action, unskippable or forced full-screen ads.
What we saw: Aggressive ad load: raised by 6 distinct reviewers (1.1% of 542 reviews scanned)

What reviewers said

Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.

Pay to progress

Should’ve been remastered — Pixel gun was one of those games that never needed a second one, I remember 2018 being around the time I played the most and 2020 being around the point the game started getting really p2w. Honestly a remake or…

5★ · App Store · 2026-09-12

too p2w and too many rngs — pls stop being greedy, 2020 PG3D was better

2★ · App Store · 2026-08-28

Game Sucks — Compared to how the gameplay use to be back when it first came out it’s like the Dev’s have just completely given up and handed the wheel over to a toddler. From the menu layout to actually playing the game it’s all just…

1★ · App Store · 2026-08-22

Aggressive ad load

Ads — To much ads for I pads

1★ · App Store · 2026-08-21

Fix your game — Still a very great game brings me back to my childhood of when I first played it however, one of the most annoying things about it is the pay to win BS that is all over this game every second I get an ad for spending 70…

4★ · App Store · 2026-07-16

Great game SOOOO MANY ADS — Love the game played it as a kid and now, but the adds after leaving a game every time is ridiculous.

4★ · App Store · 2026-06-12

How the automated analysis works

Automated, corroborated, and never human-reviewed without a person.

This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.

No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.

There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.

Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.

 Not yet human-reviewed

Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.

Hands-on inspections are not yet open.

 How this page was produced
Analyzed 2026-10-05 Version analyzed: 26.11.33 independent signals542 reviews scannedConfidence: LowNot human-reviewedVocabulary v1.13Methodology v1.3
Signals run: user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure. Not yet checked: SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text and the app manifest.